This Time Better Be Different

Today's screengrab du jour comes by way of Bloomberg TV, reminding us that this time better be different, or else (even though as we pointed out the market's forward PE multiple is now identical to where it was at the last bubble peak). And keep in mind, this is after the not so great momo crash of 2014.

LinkedIn: last quarter profit $3 million, research expenses $100 million on $400 million revenue.

If Zerohedge owners own LKND shares, manipulating the readers this way is an offense. And, since we're seeing a lot of commercials on this website, and some money flow must be happening, if I would be Zerohedge, I would be apprehensive.

Not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying that since LinkedIn $100M in expenses as "research expenses" that they could cut them out and still operate their current business, bring earning to $103M?

If so, then it should be pointed out that LinkedIn doesn't really do any "research". I'm pretty sure whatever expenses they are booking in that bucket are required for day to day operations. LinkedIn runs breakeven, and they've already had massive penetration in HR departments...

I greened you for bravery, or foolishness, or both. Good luck! I still walk with a limp after Jeff B. rammed it up hard back in 99. Think I lost 50k that year shorting AMZN in one form or another. I was right too. It was a $12 stock. To me.

This assumes that their earnings are legitimate. There's no doubt with such slim margins at Amazon, with questionable "intangible assets" being recorded by Netflix, and with sustainable growth problems at LinkedIn, that via the simple magic wond and adjustment to an estimate by the accountants, earnings will turn into losses very quickly. Remember, real cash flow is king as the balance sheet and income statement can easily be manipulated to produced desired earnings results. Or in the words from Tony Montana played by Al Pacino in the movie Scarface, "I always tell the truth, even when I lie". Translation, the cash flow statement will always tell the truth even when the income statement and balance sheet are lying.

"Gold has no earnings. It just sits there in a mindless pile. It does not grow or add value. You could own a pile of gold or Netflix 5 times over, with enough cash to plow into 7 Exxon Mobile's. Gold is the biggest bubble because it is essentially a bet against the Fed and the USA which always fails."-Warren Buffet

Whats the PE ratio of some silver in your hand? Whats the PE ratio of digital value uncollateralized? Please let me know when you can verify your ownership of said shares with the DTCC. Whats that note of exchange (currency) backed by again? Imagination?

Fuck Warrens insider gatekeepin ass.

Any more brain busters?

RIPS

EDIT: All good...sometimes in a fake world...assumptions are incorrect. Fuck Warren anyway!!

Gold is a bet on the FED. They've done exactly the same thing for 100 years. $20/oz in 1913. Buffet wouldn't be as rich if the FED didn't know how to inflate. He's running scared by making that statement.

This time will be bad. In WWII before nukes were popular national leaders realized they had to stop world domination if they wanted to survive. The exact situation exists now except it is the NWO of banksters and the Western Military Industrial Complex.

At this time the citizens of the Globalist's occupied nations are against the Globalists as are the non-western nations. It is now or never for the financial war against the Globalists to take place.

I remember discussing earnings with a rather straight headed individual. We discussed that earnings multiples are supposed to represent the time period it would take for an investment to repay your initial principal.

How anything outside 20 years is insane. I wonder if people were thinking about investing in LinkedIn during the plague? A $1000 investment then would start turning a profit now. Oh wait LinkedIn doesn't have a dividend or shares earnings with investors. So your investment will never turn positive unless you can find a greater fool to pay more for your shares than you did.

They have a fee for premium services. Not sure if that generates enough revenue to keep the lights on. Linkedin is where you can be anybody you'd like and have any degree or job you can imagine. You will have lots of friends and "connections" of persons who are equally skilled embellishers.

I once travelled 400 kms to deliver a resume ( err, that's not quite accurate. I was going that way anyway and thought it would be a good idea to drop it off on the way ). No, I wasn't allowed to speak to or even see a human being. "Go to our website", they said. And they wonder why they had a "skills shortage".

Some of those websites are impossible to navigate.

Oh, that's another story: Was unemployed for a little while, signed up with "Employment Centre". "You must visit our website at least once per week", they said. Shame it only displayed interstate jobs 5000 kms away. It hadn't yet been set up for local jobs.

Words like "evolving" are used to describe Amazon's business model, a better word might be undefined. Regardless Amazon rolls on. Pointing towards gaining synergy as they continue to buy companies, some unproven. The revenues from these companies add to their growth but still no profits exist. Does this growth mask a weakness at their core?

If they are indeed a distribution company their stock should be trading at around 18 times earnings. When you look for a P/E ratio on Amazon you find NA because the company makes no money. Another key weakness is that new competition can now cheaply and easily replicate the most profitable parts of Amazon and cherry pick much of their future potential. More on this subject in the article below.

Yes, there is that. There are also some spread strategies that could be employed. I usually stay away when the premiums are so juicy. They are being set that way for a purpose and the people setting them are going to put a lot of money into defending them.

Salesforce.com takes the DIFFERENCE in stock value that they gave to their employees (an expense under GAAP and IFRS) verses what it WOULD HAVE COST in cash and books THAT DEFERRED COST as actual cash flow. Viola! Magical cash flow appears!

THEN they add the “saved cash flow” (deferred cost, i.e. Expense) to non-GAAP earnings as “profit” thereby doing a complete Enron to convert an expense into profit.